Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

(build): update docs after publish #52

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 15, 2024
Merged

Conversation

adrobisch
Copy link
Collaborator

this adds ghpagesPushSite to the release step

  • upgrade sbt-paradox (was throwing errors on makeSite with Java 17)

not 💯 this works out with the matrix and the github token as it, but since there is only one Scala/Java defined and GITHUB_TOKEN is in env, I think it could work like that

@osxhacker
Copy link
Contributor

On a related note, updating sbt-paradox to v0.10.3 appears to have eliminated the need to explicitly "unlock" packages for reflection. This was required for successful sbt-paradox execution using v0.9.2 and JDK 17+ thusly:

JAVA_OPTS="--add-opens java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED" sbt paradox

See here for details.

👍

@osxhacker
Copy link
Contributor

FWIW, the current ci.yml definition updates the docs whenever a build is initiated. This causes the displayed version to be a "pre-tagged" version, such as 0.13.1+0-ea2eae21+20221210-1443.

I'm not sure if the Github Actions needs: [build] property can be made conditional or not. Perhaps an on: section introduced into the publish: job could achieve this? (I don't know if that is supported BTW)

If the above is not easy to specify, then it's a small discrepancy and not a blocker IMHO.

@adrobisch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Modifying githubWorkflowPublish should only affect the publish job which is only executed on tags, so I think your points are already addressed. There is no way to configure permissions right now (but sbt/sbt-github-actions#105 looks promising). Will look into working around that or maybe just wait for that to be merged.

@osxhacker
Copy link
Contributor

@adrobisch ,

This PR has had no activity for quite some time and, since it is an edge case regarding a minor documentation generation detail, perhaps it could be closed?

@adrobisch adrobisch merged commit 6945992 into main May 15, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants